What are good shoes

Richard Anonymous said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard negative
reports on Nike... Is there anything that you guys would
recommend?

If it's working for you, why worry about what some guy says
about it ? The pegasus is one of Nike's more succesful
models. Anyway, if you like the pegasus, some shoes worth
looking at are the Asics Cumulus, Mizuno Wave Rider, and
Saucony Grid Trigon (RC or LC, NOT the DC). Summary:

Wave Rider: the lightest of the three, basically like a
lightweight cushioned trainer but more durable. Nice light
mesh uppers, stays cool (sucks in air through the bottom).

Asics Cumulus: Nice flexible cushy shoe. Good cushioning
without being too heavy.

Saucony Trigon: Has a curvy last, makes for a nice toe-off.
Wide toebox, snug midfoot. I got 600 miles out of these.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

Sandals made of reeds and jute.

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard negative
reports on Nike... Is there anything that you guys would
recommend?

thankx

I'm reposting what I posted on the thread about sprained
ankles and flats.

Read this (sportsci.orgmw.htm):Open ↗

"Wearers of expensive running shoes that were promoted as
correcting pronation or providing more cushioning
experienced a greater prevalence of these running-related
injuries than wearers of less expensive shoes (Robbins and
Gouw, 1991). In another study, expensive athletic shoes
accounted for more than twice as many injuries as cheaper
shoes, a fact that prompted Robbins and Waked (1997) to
suggest that deceptive advertising of athletic footwear
(e.g., "cushioning impact"😉 may represent a public health
hazard. Anthony (1987) reported that running shoes should be
considered protective devices (from dangerous or painful
objects) rather than corrective devices, as their capacity
for shock absorption and control of over-pronation is
limited. The modern running shoe and footwear generally
reduce sensory feedback, apparently without diminishing injury-
inducing impact–a process Robbins and Gouw (1991) described
as the "perceptual illusion" of athletic footwear. A
resulting false sense of security may contribute to the risk
of injury (Robbins and Gouw, 1991). Yessis (2000, p.122)
reasoned that once the natural foot structures are weakened
by long-term footwear use, people have to rely on the
external support of the footwear, but the support does not
match that provided by a well functioning foot.

Measurements of the vertical component of ground-reaction
force during running provide no support for the notion that
running shoes reduce shock. Robbins and Gouw (1990)
reported that running shoes did not reduce shock during
running at 14 km/h on a treadmill. Bergmann et al. (1995)
found that the forces acting on the hip joint were lower
for barefoot jogging than for jogging in various kinds of
shoe. Clarke et al. (1983) observed no substantial change
in impact force when they increased the amount of heel
cushioning by 50% in the shoes of well-trained runners.
Robbins and Gouw (1990) argued that plantar sensation
induces a plantar surface protective response whereby
runners alter their behavior to reduce shock. The less-
cushioned shoe permitted increases in plantar discomfort to
be sensed and moderated, a phenomenon that they termed
"shock setting". Footwear with greater cushioning
apparently provokes a sharp reduction in shock-moderating
behaviour, thus increasing impact force (Robbins and Hanna,
1987; Robbins et al., 1989; Robbins and Gouw, 1990).

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard negative
reports on Nike... Is there anything that you guys would
recommend?

thankx

Have they stopped working for you? My Pegasus are my
favorite shoes, although I'm really liking the Zoom Elites.
I've been a happy Pegasus runner since 1988. There have been
a couple of versions that I've been less than happy with but
never enough to quit the shoe entirely.

Make sure your shoes are not wearing out (buy 2 or 3 pair a
year) and stretch after running.

Andy

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard negative
reports on Nike... Is there anything that you guys would
recommend?

thankx

Yes, any shoe except nike. Time for you to move from cheaply
made designer shoes, to a real running shoe, which would
include any brand but nike. If it works for you, then
consider Asics, they make a far superior shoe at 1/3 to 1/2
the money, and are QUALITY made, cheaper moneywise, but will
last twice as long. Why pay for big advertising bills whenm
you're looking for a real running shoe? Nikes just don't cut
it, and the latest research says you are 70% MORE PRONE to
injurys in nikes than Asics. There'll always be one or two
fools who think it's a great shoe, but then there's people
stupid enough to try to reelect a chimpanzee in the white
house too, so go figure.

Have you had problems with the Pegasus'? If not, why change?
Seriously, when I find a shoe that works for me, I stick
with it until I cannot get it anymore. My local store knows
what shoe I wear and lets me know when they hear the shoe is
being discontinued (Nike is really bad about this). I then
buy as many pair as I can.

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard negative
reports on Nike... Is there anything that you guys would
recommend?

thankx

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Wave Rider: the lightest of the three, basically like a
lightweight =

cushioned

Quoted message said:

trainer but more durable. Nice light mesh uppers, stays
cool (sucks in =

air

Quoted message said:

through the bottom).

Asics Cumulus: Nice flexible cushy shoe. Good cushioning
without being =

too=20

Quoted message said:

heavy.

Saucony Trigon: Has a curvy last, makes for a nice toe-off.
Wide toebox,=

snug

Quoted message said:

midfoot. I got 600 miles out of these.

Cheers,

Does anyone have any idea as to whether or not any of these
compare favorably to the previous Asics Gel Lyte (not DS) or
Gel 140's? My stock in my favorites are running very low.

TIA, Kevin --=20 E-mail: [email hidden]

The Buddy Guy said:

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard
negative reports on Nike... Is there anything that you
guys would recommend?

thankx

I'm reposting what I posted on the thread about sprained
ankles and flats.

Read this (sportsci.orgmw.htm):Open ↗

"Wearers of expensive running shoes that were promoted as
correcting pronation or providing more cushioning
experienced a greater prevalence of these running-related
injuries than wearers of less expensive shoes (Robbins and
Gouw, 1991).

Yes, of course. Wearers of these shoes are for the most part
those who identify themselves as being vulnerable to injury.
It shouldn't be surprising that those who consider
themselves injury prone really are.

Quoted message said:

In another study, expensive athletic shoes accounted for
more than twice as many injuries as cheaper shoes, a fact
that prompted Robbins and Waked (1997) to

This association doesn't prove anything.

I don't have my copy of Noakes with me, but there were
studies that were heavily criticised for similar reasons to
the above. It's interesting to note that nearly all of these
cites come from this Robbins guy who appears to be some sort
of anti-shoe crusader.

[snip]

Quoted message said:

Gouw, 1991). Yessis (2000, p.122) reasoned that once the
natural foot structures are weakened by long-term footwear
use, people have to rely on the external support of the
footwear, but the support does not match that provided by
a well functioning foot.

A poster hear ripped up his achilles tendons with just *30
minutes* of Yessis-inspired training. Note that Yessis's
"reasoning" is not directly supported by hard data.

Quoted message said:

Measurements of the vertical component of ground-reaction
force during running provide no support for the notion
that running shoes reduce shock. Robbins and Gouw (1990)
reported that running shoes did not reduce shock during
running at 14 km/h on a treadmill.

I'd invite anyone who really thinks that shoes "don't reduce
shock" to try a 10 mile barefoot run on the pavement.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

amh said:

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard
negative reports on Nike... Is there anything that you
guys would recommend?

thankx

Have they stopped working for you? My Pegasus are my
favorite shoes, although I'm really liking the Zoom
Elites. I've been a happy Pegasus runner since 1988. There
have been a couple of versions that I've been less than
happy with but never enough to quit the shoe entirely.

Make sure your shoes are not wearing out (buy 2 or 3 pair
a year) and stretch after running.

2 or 3 a year ? How many miles do you get per pair ? The
best I've gotten 600 out of a pair of Saucony Trigons, but I
wasn't game to push my luck further after the tread had worn
through (though they still felt OK)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

The Buddy Guy said:

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard negative
reports on Nike... Is there anything that you guys would
recommend?

thankx

I'm reposting what I posted on the thread about sprained
ankles and flats.

Read this (sportsci.orgmw.htm):Open ↗

"Wearers of expensive running shoes that were promoted as
correcting pronation or providing more cushioning
experienced a greater prevalence of these running-related
injuries than wearers of less expensive shoes (Robbins
and Gouw, 1991). In another study, expensive athletic
shoes accounted for more than twice as many injuries as
cheaper shoes,

Funny. I could have sworn I had started running in cheap
shoes and got injured straight away, then got back at it
with shoes better suited for my running mechanics. Merely a
fig newton of my imagination, no doubt.

BTW, at no extra cost: those prone to injury are
those... well... prone to injury. The right shoe will
help but not cure all.

--
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,-
,ø¤º eNo "If you can't go fast, at least go long." ø¤º°`°º¤-
ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º

+ said:

Yes, any shoe except nike. Time for you to move from
cheaply made designer shoes, to a real running shoe, which
would include any brand but nike. If it works for you,
then consider Asics, they make a far superior shoe at 1/3
to 1/2 the money, and are QUALITY made, cheaper moneywise,
but will last twice as long. Why pay for big advertising
bills whenm you're looking for a real running shoe? Nikes
just don't cut it, and the latest research says you are
70% MORE PRONE to injurys in nikes than Asics.

I'm going to ask a serious question, this is not a flame:
How does anyone know?

You say Asics are "a far superior shoe." In what sense? Is
the stitching better, or the fabric stronger, or will the
cushioning last longer? And if the answer to one or more
of these questions is "yes", how do you know? Have you
tested the cushioning material on a machine, so the
results are reproducible? (The stitching might be easier
to tell by inspection, but I've never heard anyone comment
on that aspect.)

When people say "my last pair of shoes is better/ worse
than the previous pair", I'd like to know what other
variables there are. Are they training more/ less, wearing
different socks, running in different weather, on different
surfaces, at different distances, recovering from a minor
injury, etc. etc.

I currently do trail running, mostly in the same place. I
have two pairs of trail running shoes, and more or less
alternate between them. (Don't start on the non-need for
special trail shoes: the trails are often muddy, so I do
need the extra traction.) I can't even tell you without
going to my closet what brand they are, but one was
considerably cheaper (read: low end) than the other. And
when I'm running, I can't tell which pair I have on.

In sum, my suspicion is that nearly everything you hear
about "brand X model Y is better than brand Z model T" is
anecdotal, and your mileage may, indeed will, vary. But I
won't mind a bit if someone can prove me wrong!

(I would make one exception to the above: I often get a
piece of gravel or s.t. in my shoe, and have to stop to take
it off. I imagine some shoes are better at keeping junk out
than others, and that should be easy enough to tell.
Unfortunately, neither of my current trail shoes seems to
excel at this...)

Mike McSwell

Kevin said:

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Wave Rider: the lightest of the three, basically like a
lightweight cushioned trainer but more durable. Nice light
mesh uppers, stays cool (sucks in air through the bottom).

Asics Cumulus: Nice flexible cushy shoe. Good cushioning
without being too heavy.

Saucony Trigon: Has a curvy last, makes for a nice
toe-off. Wide toebox, snug midfoot. I got 600 miles
out of these.

Cheers,

Does anyone have any idea as to whether or not any of
these compare favorably to the previous Asics Gel Lyte
(not DS) or Gel 140's? My stock in my favorites are
running very low.

Though I haven't used it, the Gel Lyte is a
lightweight trainer.

The only one of these three shoes that is close to being a
lightweight trainer is the Mizuno. I like the Mizuno -- its
breathability is a big plus, especially in summer. It's
light enough for speed work, and durable/cushioned enough
for general purpose training.

As far as Asics is concerned, the counterpart to the Mizuno
Wave Rider would be the Landreth (light cushioned trainer,
more durable than the DS models), not the Cumulus.

BTW, have you tried the Verdict ? I'm using this as a speed
shoe. I haven't put many miles on it yet, but the outsole
doesn't look like it's up to high milage.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

Mike Maxwell said:

+ said:

Yes, any shoe except nike. Time for you to move from
cheaply made designer shoes, to a real running shoe,
which would include any brand but nike. If it works for
you, then consider Asics, they make a far superior shoe
at 1/3 to 1/2 the money, and are QUALITY made, cheaper
moneywise, but will last twice as long. Why pay for big
advertising bills whenm you're looking for a real
running shoe? Nikes just don't cut it, and the latest
research says you are 70% MORE PRONE to injurys in nikes
than Asics.

I'm going to ask a serious question, this is not a flame:
How does anyone know?

He got injured in a pair of Nikes and has been [censored]
about them ever since.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

amh said:

"Richard Anonymous" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I currently love my Nike Pegasus, but, have heard
negative reports on Nike... Is there anything that you
guys would recommend?

thankx

Have they stopped working for you? My Pegasus are my
favorite shoes, although I'm really liking the Zoom
Elites. I've been a happy Pegasus runner since 1988.
There have been a couple of versions that I've been less
than happy with but never enough to quit the shoe
entirely.

Make sure your shoes are not wearing out (buy 2 or 3
pair a year) and stretch after running.

2 or 3 a year ? How many miles do you get per pair ? The
best I've gotten 600 out of a pair of Saucony Trigons, but
I wasn't game to push my luck further after the tread had
worn through (though they still felt OK)

Cheers,

I've never measured my mileage. I go by how they feel. I
have had shoes that I've worn over the span of 2 years. I
have 2 pair I do my regular running in, a racing pair and
sometimes a track pair. I'll typically run 30-40 miles per
week. I'm pretty lightweight (Under 140) and don't pound
much, just lucky.

Just for fun (and a bit of superstition) I used to wear my
first pair of Pegasus for my usual 4 miler the day before a
race. I don't know how many miles I had in them but they
fell apart on me. 5 years of running in a pair of shoes is
apparently an upper limit.

Andy

Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

2 or 3 a year ? How many miles do you get per pair ? The
best I've gotten 600 out of a pair of Saucony Trigons, but
I wasn't game to push my luck further after the tread had
worn through (though they still felt OK)

Cheers,

Donovan, The idiot is wearing NIKES, so of course he goes
through 2,3, or 4 pairs a year. He continually rants how
great they are, but has to buy 2 or 3 pairs a year?
LOLOL. Gee, I'm on year 3 of my older Asics, and they are
still great off road, and my newest ones are over a year
now at 9 miles a day, with NO SIGNS OF WEAR on them. And
to think I pay a
1/3 to 1/2 less too? Not just that, but notice how he skirts
the mileage question? I'm betting if he did more than 3
miles his ankles would break. The more he posts, the more
we know he's just a troll, or just a fool.

[email hidden] (amh) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I've never measured my mileage.

Gee, a runner who has never measured their mileage? See the
pattern of BS developing?

Quoted message said:

I go by how they feel. I have had shoes that I've worn over
the span of 2 years.

Sure weren't nikes. Gee, you say you buy 2 or 3 pairs a
year. How many feet do you have?

Quoted message said:

I have 2 pair I do my regular running in, a racing pair
and sometimes a track pair. I'll typically run 30-40 miles
per week.

All these shoes? If true (anything he says is suspect now)
How can you wear and own all these shoes but buy 2 or 3 a
year? You are either throwing them out and not telling us,
or you are a millipede. But if true, you are only wearing
them a very few miles each, this explains why nikes suffice.
You are not a real runner.

Quoted message said:

I'm pretty lightweight (Under 140)
and don't pound much, just lucky.

As I've stated many times, nikes are only/barely suitable
for lightweights with no pronation etc issues, for the rest
of us they are trash..

Quoted message said:

Just for fun (and a bit of superstition) I used to wear my
first pair of Pegasus for my usual 4 miler the day before
a race. I don't know how many miles I had in them but they
fell apart on me. 5 years of running in a pair of shoes is
apparently an upper limit.

Andy

Gee, someone's been reading my posts about my Asics being so
durable. Of course if I was a 140lber, doing 30 miles a
week, alternating between 5 different pairs of shoes, I
could get by with a [censored] shoe like nike too. Write back when
you become a REAL runner lil' boy. Actually, I suspect
Roidgers 'subtle trolling method' behind this.

[email hidden] (amh) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Just for fun (and a bit of superstition) I used to wear
my first pair of Pegasus for my usual 4 miler the day
before a race.

Gee you mean you actually raced? How about a link so we can
see if your legit?

"+" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

2 or 3 a year ? How many miles do you get per pair ? The
best I've

gotten 600

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

out of a pair of Saucony Trigons, but I wasn't game to
push my luck

further

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

after the tread had worn through (though they still
felt OK)

Cheers,

Donovan, The idiot is wearing NIKES, so of course he goes
through 2,3, or 4 pairs a year.

Yo [censored]. I wear 4-6 pairs a year and wear Asics. They
are good for at best 500 miles before they get used for
lawn mowing.

Quoted message said:

The more he posts, the more we know he's just a troll, or
just a fool.

There is troll out here and it's you but you know that. -DF

+ said:

Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

2 or 3 a year ? How many miles do you get per pair ? The
best I've gotten 600 out of a pair of Saucony Trigons,
but I wasn't game to push my luck further after the tread
had worn through (though they still felt OK)

Cheers,

Donovan, The idiot is wearing NIKES, so of course he goes
through 2,3, or 4 pairs a year. He continually rants how
great they are, but has to buy 2 or 3 pairs a year? LOLOL.
Gee, I'm on year 3 of my older Asics, and they are still
great off road, and my newest ones are over a year now at
9 miles a day, with NO SIGNS OF WEAR on them.

I'm glad you've gotten this much wear out of your Asics
shoes. I wear Asics for the most part (Nimbus, Cumulus,
Verdict, Tiger Paw, DS Racer) and they are reasonably
durable, but I doubt I'd get more than about 700 miles per
pair. They don't seem substantially more durable than the
other brands that I wear (Saucony and Mizuno)

Quoted message said:

And to think I pay a 1/3 to 1/2 less too?

Don't see much difference here. Asics also have some
expensive models (Nimbus, Kayano) but also some very
reasonably priced models (Cumulus, 20xx). Likewise, the Nike
Pegasus shoe is reasonably priced. Much like you or I would
just ignore the Kayano and go with a cheaper (and arguably
better) model, most serious runners who wear Nike are not
wearing the $150 Shox TL model.

I've noticed that most of the people who are happy with Nike
shoes are those who use their lighter cushioned models or
racing flats -- Pegasus, Spiridon, Air Streak, or even the
Zoom elite. Asics on the other hand have strong models in
all categories. So I agree that Nike aren't really the first
choice for those who need more stability.

Quoted message said:

would break. The more he posts, the more we know he's just
a troll, or just a fool.

He's been posting here for quite a while now, and his posts
do not read like trolls. But maybe it's all a contrived act
so that he can upset Good Old Bill by talking about how good
Nikes are (-;

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗